Atheists and Believers

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
http://www.cracked.com/article_15759_10-things-christians-atheists-can-and-must-agree-on.html

This is a pretty nice article about the things believers(i know the link says christians but it can apply to all non-atheist) and atheists(let's put agnostics in this bunch as well) can agree upon. To avoid the conflict we have in these forums, let's start by al s Have Brought Good to the Table

10. You'll Never Harass the Other Side Out of Existence

I disagree with 1;

“....1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One ….”

I know that communism and fascism have arbitrarily been associated with atheism as if they are equivalent but communism and fascism is nothing to do with atheism. Many communists are theists and many fascists were also theists;

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/murphy_19_2.html

“...Hitler was a Roman Catholic …..and was confirmed as a "soldier of Christ" ….”

if you are referring to social Darwinism, then, again, social Darwinism has nothing to do with atheism but has also little to do with evolution as the theory of evolution says/implies nothing about how we morally SHOULD behave! Thus, unlike evolution, social Darwinism is not a scientific hypothesis and thus can be seen as inconsistent with rationally-based atheism because of this for surely non-scientific hypotheses are generally rejected by atheists else most wouldn't be atheist!

When was Terrible Things done by an atheist that said “in the name of atheism...” to justify those Terrible Things?

I am not sure what you mean by;

“...7. We Tend to Exaggerate About Ourselves, Too ...”

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
ok so how about we let the correctness or incorrectness of your posts and context slide . you believe the meaning as you intended is offensive i belive it wasn't. not important.

instead let us focus on what you did mean. beliefs can be offensive by themselves without grousome events transpiring as a result. and yes, i do refer to expressed beliefs, obvi ...[text shortened]... eist view is offensive to christians and vice - versa. offensive, not valid/invalid.

you believe the meaning as you intended is offensive

Sorry, I'm not sure what you're refering to.

beliefs can be offensive by themselves without grousome events transpiring as a result

Agreed. I didn't contradict that.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i am the original poster. i presented the topic. anything else i posted is in response to (in my view) your flawed in pointless complaint. my contribution isn't in question here because i have not elaborated but merely pointed out your flawed reasoning. my contribution (or rather that of the one who wrote the article) remains unchanged.

So your flawed and idiotic reasoning is irrelevant? Fine.

Don't post anything if you don't want it to be responded to.

You haven't put forth anything but a ridiculous argument in response to my posts. So what?

All you've done is act very defensively about what you posted as if you were somehow offended that I made a contribution to your prescious thread.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
ok so how about we let the correctness or incorrectness of your posts and context slide . you believe the meaning as you intended is offensive i belive it wasn't. not important.

instead let us focus on what you did mean. beliefs can be offensive by themselves without grousome events transpiring as a result. and yes, i do refer to expressed beliefs, obvi ...[text shortened]... eist view is offensive to christians and vice - versa. offensive, not valid/invalid.

just because the recipient of the hate message is not offended because he "knows" the other is wrong doesn't mean other in his shoes wouldn't be.

So what? That doesn't contradict anything I have said.

you but you feel offended, or better said, the claim in question is offensive nonetheless.


On this you do have a point - but I did mention before that the belief as a concept can be offensive. I do think that the christian view that an atheist will go to hell is not offensive though - whether other atheists get offended at that is not my concern.

i still believe you didn't read the link. or you skimmed it. otherwise you would have seen the examples given and why exactly atheist view is offensive to christians and vice - versa. offensive, not valid/invalid

You can believe in the tooth fairy also, but you would be wrong in believing that too.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
just because the recipient of the hate message is not offended because he "knows" the other is wrong doesn't mean other in his shoes wouldn't be.

So what? That doesn't contradict anything I have said.

you but you feel offended, or better said, the claim in question is offensive nonetheless.


On this you do have a point - but I did ...[text shortened]...

You can believe in the tooth fairy also, but you would be wrong in believing that too.

i believe you will suffer for an eternity in a place of immeasurable pain and aguish. you don't find that at all offensive? does it matter that the place exists or not? does it matter that you aren't yourself offended?

"You can believe in the tooth fairy also, but you would be wrong in believing that too"

i also believed you are one of the smarter ones here. it seems i definetely was wrong in that.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i believe you will suffer for an eternity in a place of immeasurable pain and aguish. you don't find that at all offensive? does it matter that the place exists or not? does it matter that you aren't yourself offended?

"You can believe in the tooth fairy also, but you would be wrong in believing that too"

i also believed you are one of the smarter ones here. it seems i definetely was wrong in that.

i believe you will suffer for an eternity in a place of immeasurable pain and aguish. you don't find that at all offensive?

Not really. Why should I?

does it matter that the place exists or not?

Yes. I would find it more offensive if I believed the place did exist.

does it matter that you aren't yourself offended?

To me, yes. To someone else, probably not.

i also believed you are one of the smarter ones here. it seems i definetely was wrong in that

Aaaah...stooping to personal insults. Very mature. Apparently you aren't capable of a mature civil discourse.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I disagree with 1;

“....1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One ….”

I know that communism and fascism have arbitrarily been associated with atheism as if they are equivalent but communism and fascism is nothing to do with atheism. Many communists are theists and many fascists were also theists;

http://www.secularhumanism.org/ ...[text shortened]...

I am not sure what you mean by;

“...7. We Tend to Exaggerate About Ourselves, Too ...”

"The religious leader sends his people into battle because he thinks God commanded it, the Stalins and Maos of the world do the same because they see their people as nothing more than meaty fuel to be ground up to feed the machinery of The State. In both cases, the people are equally dead."

number 1 is a little forced. however, to be fair, no atheist would claim he does what he does "in the name of". he is an atheist, he doesn't have any religion to act in the name of. the stalin simply refused to adhere to a moral code and so reduced the human being disposable.


some people will kill and maim and reasons will be found. the point the author is trying to make is that just because you have no god to use as justification it doesn't mean murders will not happen. he (in my view) correctly points out that it is not the religions or lack of that do the murdering, it is the people. that people are capable of murdering regardless of believing or not in something.

this is my take on the point. that being said, perhaps the "in the name of" isn't needed in the bullet point, nor does he argue in favor of a system or another inspiring murders. he made a title but argued something different.


7. We Tend to Exaggerate About Ourselves, Too ...
some christians (or any other theist) refuse to admit they ever doubted god exists or that if a certain passage in their holy book is real.

likewise, some atheists refuse to admit sometimes they wonder whether there isn't a benevolent force behind it all that will take us to something nice after we die.
"Atheists still tell their girlfriends they "love" them, and not that they simply feel a psychological artifact of a biochemical bond generated by the mating instinct. They still refer to their "mind" as if it's something more than chemical switches. And remember what we talked about with "justice" and "right" and "wrong." None of it is scientific.

Even weirder? Free will. Remember, to a neuroscientist, free will is every bit as real as the Tooth Fairy. They can watch your neurons light up at the moment you make moral decisions, can trace the exact electrochemical pathways. If there is nothing beyond the physical, then your ability to choose your actions vanishes along with God and Heaven and the angels."



so in order to win an argument, some tend to paint themselves more than what they are. read the article, he makes some interesting points.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
i believe you will suffer for an eternity in a place of immeasurable pain and aguish. you don't find that at all offensive?

Not really. Why should I?

does it matter that the place exists or not?

Yes. I would find it more offensive if I believed the place did exist.

does it matter that you aren't yourself offended?

To ...[text shortened]... to personal insults. Very mature. Apparently you aren't capable of a mature civil discourse.

"Aaaah...stooping to personal insults. Very mature. Apparently you aren't capable of a mature civil discourse."

insult? why? don't you know yourself that your stupidity is fictional? why are you insulted? and if you are not, how did you figure out it is an insult?

after all, i said i thought you were among the smarter ones but not anymore. you felt insulted because of that even if i could have meant "you are not as smart as the 3 most smartest people here, you are 4th". jumping to conclusions, are we?



EDIT: on a side note, you were careful not to call me stupid. you just called my arguments stupid. congratulations, you are very gratious.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"Aaaah...stooping to personal insults. Very mature. Apparently you aren't capable of a mature civil discourse."

insult? why? don't you know yourself that your stupidity is fictional? why are you insulted? and if you are not, how did you figure out it is an insult?

You prove my point - you either aren't capable or aren't willing to have a mature, civil discourse.

EDIT: I didn't say I was offended. I wasn't - but that doesn't change that it was an insult.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
You prove my point - you either aren't capable or aren't willing to have a mature, civil discourse.

EDIT: I didn't say I was offended. I wasn't - but that doesn't change that it was an insult.

what discourse? you offer only claim, no arguments. you claim to have said this and that, you claim my post was flawed, you claim someone thinking another will burn for all eternity for his morality isn't offensive.

the few arguments you do bring are contradicting. a christian thinking an atheist will burn for all eternity isn't offensive, but a nazi thinking a jew is inferrior is. (a hint: they both are)

"I didn't say I was offended. I wasn't - but that doesn't change that it was an insult"

yeh, thank you for summing my point so nicely. that was what i and the author of the article was trying to say.


EDIT: please read hamilton's post regarding some of the bullet points. argue more like that and less like you.

Where do I fit in?
I don't believe in God nor do I not believe in god.
The term "god" (as usually defined by deists) makes no sense to me, so how can I believe or disbelieve.
I don't quarrel with religionists...their faith is kinda endearing as long as they are not condemning others or telling me what my fate will be.

Who cares what anybody thinks anyway..?
Believe any crap you want to..no problem. Bet on any horse in the race. Be my guest..even if the horse is imaginary. Most of what we believe is imaginary, anyway

Originally posted by dube
Where do I fit in?
I don't believe in God nor do I not believe in god.
The term "god" (as usually defined by deists) makes no sense to me, so how can I believe or disbelieve.
I don't quarrel with religionists...their faith is kinda endearing as long as they are not condemning others or telling me what my fate will be.

Who cares what anybody thinks anyway ...[text shortened]... . Be my guest..even if the horse is imaginary. Most of what we believe is imaginary, anyway

Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable.[1] Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the similarities or differences between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief.


do you recognize yourself in this? if you don't i don't know where to place you. you would know more about yourself than anyone else so have fun looking

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
what discourse? you offer only claim, no arguments. you claim to have said this and that, you claim my post was flawed, you claim someone thinking another will burn for all eternity for his morality isn't offensive.

the few arguments you do bring are contradicting. a christian thinking an atheist will burn for all eternity isn't offensive, but a nazi thinking a jew is inferrior is. (a hint: they both are)

You have provided the exact quality arguments that I have. You haven't backed up your claims either.

I claim someone thinking that I will go to hell isn't offensive to me and shouldn't be to an atheist - that is my opinion. This whole thing for the most part is a matter of opinion. Offence is inherrently subjective and yet you think I (or anyone) can make an objective argument about a subjective matter?

My arguments weren't a contradiction- you just consistently misunderstood them and then balked when I tried to explain them.

There is a distinct difference between a christian thinking someone will go to hell and a nazi thinking a jew is inferior. Am I stupid because you can't see the difference?

From the start you have been condescending, defensive and agressive in your responses and not at all curious about what I actually think. I frankly don't think you even wanted to know what I actually think or thought, but wanted more to have the fight for the sake of the fight. I may have contributed to that in the tone of my posts, but that doesn't change anything.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
EDIT: please read hamilton's post regarding some of the bullet points. argue more like that and less like you.

Edit: Really? Are you 12 years old?

You fail to even understand what I'm saying and you act like a passive agressive child.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"The religious leader sends his people into battle because he thinks God commanded it, the Stalins and Maos of the world do the same because they see their people as nothing more than meaty fuel to be ground up to feed the machinery of The State. In both cases, the people are equally dead."

number 1 is a little forced. however, to be fair, no atheist wou ...[text shortened]... e than what they are. read the article, he makes some interesting points.

“..."Atheists still tell their girlfriends they "love" them, and not that they simply feel a psychological artifact of a biochemical bond generated by the mating instinct. ...”

couldn't the word “love” mean a feeling of a “ psychological artefact of a biochemical bond generated by the mating instinct” to both an atheist and a theist?
I don't see any conflict here (although perhaps you didn't imply any? )